Decoding Victory in Cycling's Grand Monuments: A Performance Analysis of Top‐5 Versus Top‐6–30 Finishers

This study aimed to examine the key performance metrics and durability differences between cyclists finishing in the top‐5 and those ranked between 6th and 30th in the Five Monuments of Cycling (Milan‐San Remo, Tour of Flanders, Paris‐Roubaix, Liège‐Bastogne‐Liège, and Il Lombardia). Data from 64 professional male cyclists were analyzed. Cyclists were categorized into top‐5 finishers (n = 14) and top‐6–30 finishers (n = 50). Race data were extracted from .fit files, including power output (PO), mean maximal power (MMP) across multiple durations (5 s, 30 s, 1 min, 5 min, 10 min, and 20 min), and power decay after accumulated workloads (30, 40, 50, and 60 kJ kg−1). Top‐5 finishers exhibited significantly higher MMP for 5‐min (d = 0.7; p = 0.02), 10‐min (d = 0.8; p = 0.01), and 20‐min efforts (d = 1.0; p = 0.01) compared to top‐6–30 finishers. No significant differences were found in shorter durations (p > 0.05). Power decay analysis revealed that top‐6–30 cyclists experienced greater reductions in MMP at 60 kJ kg−1, particularly for 10‐min (d = 1.3; p < 0.01) and 20‐min efforts (d = 1.2; p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in total energy expenditure or time spent in power zones between groups. Top‐5 finishers showed higher durability, with less power decay compared to top‐6–30 finishers in the Five Monuments. These findings highlight functional performance differences (e.g., MMP, power decay) associated with top‐5 finishes, though physiological mechanisms remain speculative. This study extends prior research by focusing on elite finishers in the Five Monuments.